2021/22 Cycle Profile/Results/Lessons

[honeymoow]

Taking after last year's thread created by @BrownSugar, I thought we might start a thread for users to post their results and advice for future applicants, once their admissions cycle is over!
 

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution:  
Major(s)/Minor(s):
Undergrad GPA:  
Type of Grad:  
Grad GPA:  
GRE:  
Any Special Courses:
Letters of Recommendation:
Teaching/Research Experience:
Other:

RESULTS:
Acceptances:
Rejections:
Pending:

Attending:

LESSONS LEARNED:

Edited February 15, 2022 by honeymoow

[LatinAmericanFootball]

Thanks for starting the thread! I'll wait for my last results before posting, but for future reference I'd like to add the links to the past threads, which were really helpful to me:

 

[honeymoow]

PROFILE:

Type of Undergrad Institution: Ivy
Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science / Data Science
Undergrad GPA: 3.85 CGPA (cumulative), 3.96 in-major GPA
Type of Grad: n/a
Grad GPA: n/a
GRE: 338 (170Q, 168 V) + 5.5 writing
Any Special Courses: Graduate-level seminar(s) and methods course(s)
Letters of Recommendation: 3 active + tenured, 1 tenure-track; did multi-year research for all four
Teaching/Research Experience: ~6 research assistant positions in specific areas of interest at different universities (remote) + honors thesis
Other: 

RESULTS:

Acceptances: Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Columbia
Rejections: MIT
Pending: n/a

LESSONS LEARNED:

Engage with as much scholarly research as possible! Don't be afraid to reach out to professors and really put yourself out there. I've spend the last couple of years really focused on research and it really showed, in my statement(s) of purpose, letters of recommendation, and experience. For every academic interest that I mentioned anywhere on my application / every professor with whom I stated that I'd like to work, I had very specific research assistance experience that backed up my statements. I think this is far and away the most important element for applications, and I think admissions are less opaque than they otherwise appear because of this. To future applicants — make sure you do this (conduct a lot of research / do a lot of research assistant work, either paid or unpaid) and ask those professors for letters of recommendation. None of my letters came from faculty that I'd taken courses with. Other than that, and making sure that current graduate students / professors read your statement of purpose, best of luck! 

Also, I know users in similar threads across previous years posted the structure of their statement of purpose. Here's what I did:

i. Three sentences of very specific research interests with explicit mention of field and sub focuses 
ii. Paragraph that addresses a broader gap in the literature across all these focuses
iii. Paragraph on sub focus (a) that describes research experience and courses
iv. Summary of independent research related to sub focus (a)
v. Paragraph on sub focus (b) that describes research experience and courses
vi. Paragraph on sub focus (c) that describes research experience and courses
vii. Summary of independent research related to sub focus (b)
viii. Paragraph listing all the faculty, centres, and programs I'd like to engage with, tying all into sub focuses
iv. Summary of all of the above and explicitly stated post-PhD goals

Edited February 24, 2022 by honeymoow

[phdhell]

15 hours ago, honeymoow said:

PROFILE:

Type of Undergrad Institution: Ivy
Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science / Data Science
Undergrad GPA: 3.85 CGPA (cumulative), 3.96 in-major GPA
Type of Grad: n/a
Grad GPA: n/a
GRE: 338 (170Q, 168 V) + 5.5 writing
Any Special Courses: Graduate-level seminar(s) and methods course(s)
Letters of Recommendation: 3 active + tenured, 1 tenure-track; did multi-year research for all four
Teaching/Research Experience: ~6 research assistant positions in specific areas of interest at different universities (remote) + honors thesis
Other: 

RESULTS:

Acceptances: Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Columbia
Rejections: MIT
Pending: n/a

LESSONS LEARNED:

Engage with as much scholarly research as possible! Don't be afraid to reach out to professors and really put yourself out there. I've spend the last couple of years really focused on research and it really showed, in my statement(s) of purpose, letters of recommendation, and experience. For every academic interest that I mentioned anywhere on my application / every professor with whom I stated that I'd like to work, I had very specific research assistance experience that backed up my statements. I think this is far and away the most important element for applications, and I think admissions are less opaque than they otherwise appear because of this. To future applicants — make sure you do this (conduct a lot of research / do a lot of research assistant work, either paid or unpaid) and ask those professors for letters of recommendation. None of my letters came from faculty that I'd taken courses with. Other than that, and making sure that current graduate students / professors read your statement of purpose, best of luck! 

Also, I know users in similar threads across previous years posted the structure of their statement of purpose. Here's what I did:

i. Three sentences of very specific research interests with explicit mention of field and sub focuses 
ii. Paragraph that addresses a broader gap in the literature across all these focuses
iii. Paragraph on sub focus (a) that describes research experience and courses
iv. Summary of independent research related to sub focus (a)
v. Paragraph on sub focus (b) that describes research experience and courses
vi. Paragraph on sub focus (c) that describes research experience and courses
vii. Summary of independent research related to sub focus (b)
viii. Paragraph listing all the faculty, centres, and programs I'd like to engage with, tying all into sub focuses
iv. Summary of all of the above and explicitly stated post-PhD goals

Thanks so much for posting this! Just a question: how long did you wait in between graduating and applying this cycle? Also, any advice on how to find academic oriented research assistant work?

[honeymoow]

53 minutes ago, phdhell said:

Thanks so much for posting this! Just a question: how long did you wait in between graduating and applying this cycle? Also, any advice on how to find academic oriented research assistant work?

Sure! I'm still in college, and would recommend just cold-emailing as many professors in your area of interest as possible (just don't be too annoying about it!).

[LatinAmericanFootball]

Let's do it!

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Large public in my country, mostly unknown in the US
Major: Political Science
Undergrad GPA: Doesn't translate well but should be something between 3.6 and 3.7
Type of Grad: Large private in my country, well-known
Grad GPA: 3.92
GRE: 170Q/165V/4.5AW
Any Special Courses: Lots of substantive polisci and quant methods
Letters of Recommendation: Undergrad advisor (AP), Grad advisor (tenured associate), prof in a US T-20 who I RAed for (AP), prof in a top European uni who I RAed for (full prof). I'm very close to the first two, a bit less to the others, but I can only assume all letters were very strong. All four of them did their PhDs in the US and are well-known in the subfield.
Teaching/Research Experience: Lots of TAing and RAing since undergrad. A few conference presentations, no publications.
Subfields: Comparative politics, political economy, methods, Latin America
Other: I'm an advanced R user and briefly worked as a data scientist for a think-tank. I also think my writing sample was pretty good - some POIs complimented me for it. It's very quant-heavy, which certainly helped.

RESULTS:
Acceptances: Harvard, Berkeley, Princeton, Columbia, MIT, NYU, UCSD, Emory, Vanderbilt, UT-Austin (all funded)
Rejections: Stanford, Yale, Chicago PolEcon
Waitlists: Notre Dame, WUSTL
Going to: Not sure yet!

LESSONS/ADVICE:

1. I honestly would have never expected to have such a successful cycle. I knew I had a competitive profile, but I expected to receive maybe 2 or 3 acceptances because admissions are so unpredictable. Instead, I got in at 10 amazing programs, including some of my dream schools. I know that assessing exactly how competitive you are is really difficult, but if I were to apply again (or advice someone on applying), I'd say the ideal range in the number of places to apply to is something like 8-10. I also could have saved a few months of my savings if I had applied to fewer places. But then again, if you can afford it, the worst thing that can happen is you get too many offers and have to spend some time making a decision and declining offers.
2. Letters of Recommendation are really important. I obviously didn't get to see my letters, but POIs at places that accepted me all mentioned that "the strong words of my recommenders" were a factor for admitting me. It's not always easy to strike a balance between recommenders being famous and liking you, but you should absolutely try to maximize these things. If you can't, choose the recommender that's most likely to say you can walk on water.
3. Take your time on the GREs. It's not a particularly hard test, but it demands that you really get used to its style. I studied with Magoosh's prep, but there are many high-quality, free or very cheap options online (check out Gregmat). My Quant score was certainly an important part of the story I wanted to tell in my application, as an additional credential of my aptitude for studying some of my interests (political economy and methods). Also, I almost retook the test because of my unimpressive AW, but it doesn't seem to have made a difference (maybe programs discounted the fact that I'm an international student?).
4. My SOP's structure was similar to @honeymoow's and to some successful applicants of previous cycles (check out sloth_girl's in the 2020 thread). Given all of our results, I think it's a very competent template - just make sure you understand its purpose and then dedicate yourself to the content. I started with a paragraph summarizing my research interests and my career goal, then a paragraph saying how I prepared myself for an academic career. Then I had 4 paragraphs with research interests - two substantive, one methodological, one regional focus. I tried to tie into all of them what work I have already done in that domain and to mention some sort of question or approach I'd like to explore going forward into my doctoral studies. Finally, I had one "fit" paragraph where I named 3-4 faculty members who I'd like to work with at that specific place and how their interests are similar to my own, and a mostly generic concluding paragraph. The main point here is to make your SOP be about how your experiences and interests make you an ideal candidate for conducting new research at this place. Don't fall into the trap of making it a personal statement - places that want to know more about you as a person will ask for a separate essay with that information. A SOP is first and foremost a research statement.
5. I mistakenly called Harvard's Department of Government as "Department of Political Science" in my SOP, and somehow still got in. Always proofread your statements so that you don't go through the stress I went through when I noticed it, but if you end up doing something like that, don't fret, because it probably won't be something that gets you in/keeps you out.
6. I obsessed over GradCafe more than I should have. I sh*t you not, I clicked on "Next unread topic" at the bottom of the page until I reached posts from 2012. I learned a lot of useful information, but much more useless stuff - these things are cumulative and saturate really fast, and you mostly have the same advice and questions every year. I highly recommend reading the Profile/Results threads I posted above, and maybe glossing over some of the official Application Cycle threads, but that's basically it.
7. Don't bother checking the application portals daily. One thing I learned this year is that good application news arrive faster than bad news - acceptances came with excited emails from POIs or the DGS before the portal changed, while rejections came with automated emails asking to check the portal for updates.

I think that's it. These forums really helped me knowing what a great application looked like when I started preparing, and to keep me sane while waiting for results, so I hope my experience can be of help to future applicants. Also feel free to ask here or send me a private message in case I can help with something else - I will try to check every once in a while. Good luck everyone!

[zoooxu]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution:  UC San Diego
Major(s): Political Science | Joint Math-Econ
Undergrad GPA:  3.82; Major GPA: 3.93
GRE:  166 Q; 163V; 5A
Any Special Courses (3.9 GPA): 8 PhD-level courses (including 2 methods) + 2 master-level courses, by the time of application
Letters of Recommendation: 2 Distinguished + 1 Prof; I took grad courses with all three. I studied with my first recommender since my freshman year (directed reading/senior thesis); Go to their office hours or just talk to them about your interest/progress at least monthly!!!
Teaching/Research Experience: 2RA experiences (not research interest related)
 

RESULTS: Applied for CP/IR; doing CPE/IPE
Acceptances: Berkeley, Yale, UC San Diego, UCLA
Rejections: Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, UMichi, Uhicago (PE)
Pending: NYU, Duke
Attending: Berkeley or Yale since I am doing CPE/IPE related topics.

LESSONS LEARNED:

1. I think my quant skills are not the most excellent part of my application for sure. I should have taken more quant grad courses to prove that I can do more math/DS. I got a few B-B+ in my Econ (not much excuses there; just didn't care about them as much as my poli sci courses; should have cared). Also, I think Berkeley and Yale like my profile because of my qualitative skills/grad course. 

2. SOP is super important, and I think I completed that really well. Please ask your profs to edit it. It is important to hear comments from grad students, but there seems to be a generation gap between older profs and students's perceptions of a good SOP. For example, most grad students suggested me to start my SOP with a research question, but my profs literally said no one (really) cares (unless it is a really good unanswered question with potential). Start by introducing yourself a little bit. Since I am an international student, my profs specifically asked me to briefly emphasize on my high school experience in the states to send a signal to the committee that I can write and read fluently in English. 

SOP Structure: 1. intro; 2. grad courses/quant skills (RA); 3 - 5: three ongoing projects I am working on; 6. other research interests; 7. why this school? 

3. I think I could not have made it without supports from grad cafe and my friends. Find friends to apply tgt, even from different fields. Studying with them will give you a lot of strength and discipline. 

4. Decide early or at least plan your research opportunities early; I know I wanted to do research and a PhD at the end of my freshman year. It was mainly because I took a master-level course and completed an original project; I found the process super enjoyable. Do *directed reading courseS* in your second or third year with profs to build your letter and research experience/ability. Do the senior thesis also! 

Am I happy with my results? Yes and no. I thought I had a strong shot at Harvard or Princeton, but I think I gave my best here. Berkeley and Yale both have super great CPE/IPE people I want to work with. I hope you find this helpful. I wanted to contribute back to this forum as it has helped me tremendously. 

please excuse my grammar, sentence fragment, or typo  

 

 

 

 

Edited February 25, 2022 by zoooxu

[marshmellowcat]

PROFILE
Type of Undergrad Institution: state school
Major(s)/Minor(s): IR, Econ
Undergrad GPA: 3.9 Major GPA: 4.0
GRE: 165V/166Q
Any Special Courses: lots of quant courses in Econ-econometrics, game theory, forecasting, etc 
Letters of Recommendation: 2 advisors + 1 retired prof. I took classes with the first two and worked on research with the other.
Teaching/Research Experience: TA in intro econ
Other: had a lot of internships/professional experiences because I wasn't set on applying to phd programs until the last minute ? 

RESULTS:
Acceptances: Harvard, MIT, UCSD
Rejections: Princeton, Stanford

LESSONS LEARNED:

1) Echoing what @honeymoow and @LatinAmericanFootball said, I also structured my SOP entirely around research interests and questions. I was getting mixed messages on this when I applied because an undergrad program advisor explicitly told me to 'focus on your story and personality'. In the end I chose to be non-personal at all and I think it worked well.

SOP Structure: 1. big research question+summary of my qualifications; 2. sub-research question 1+how my past experiences could help me answer it; 3. sub-research question 2...; 5. mentioning faculty and how my interests tie with their work

2) The polar opposite of @zoooxu, I did not decide to apply until the last minute! I did research throughout undergrad but I never took any grad courses, had 0 RA experience, and spent a lot of my time doing policy work. Many aspects of my application could be improved. However, I think it went well because I have great fit with some faculty in all 3 programs and I have articulated my interest well in my SOP. So don't panic if you are applying with a short time span.

[jjiffy]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: Top 50ish private uni with a big poli sci program and IR policy school. 
Major(s)/Minor(s): International Affairs with History Minor
Undergrad GPA: 3.72
Type of Grad:  UChicago CIR. Currently a student here so I applied to PhDs before the end of the 1st quarter here. 
Grad GPA:  3.92 (but most schools didnt have my grad GPA as apps were due before grades were posted)
GRE:  168v/160q/5.5w
Any Special Courses: Lots of general IR courses and an IR research seminar. Did an independent study of the IR/Security PhD field seminar with a professor. Research Methods and Intro to Stats. Overall very weak quant training. At Chicago, I did a PhD Qual methods/Research design course and the first course in their quant sequence. 

Letters of Recommendation: All three of my letters were from people at my undergrad institution who I had known for years and built very strong relationships with. One was a full professor who is very famous in the field and was my thesis advisor. The second is a well known associate professor who oversaw my independent study. The final was a nontenured non-poli sci instructional faculty/admin who oversaw my undergraduate research program. 

Teaching/Research Experience: I have no TA experience and only recently started working as an RA. In undergrad, I was part of a two year research fellowship/program thing designed for people wanting to get PhDs/fulbrights/etc. I did independent research under my faculty advisor which culminated in my thesis as part of that program. I won some grant awards for it, presented it at a few internal symposium/conferences and had it published in the program's yearly journal (so not really a *real* publication). I also did a separate undergrad research seminar as a Junior. At Chicago, I am doing thesis work and have been an RA for a very well known faculty member. 

Other: It should be noted that I applied with only a few months of Chicago under my belt so I probably didn't reap the full benefits of it. I opted to apply this cycle just to see if it would work out and figured I could always apply next year if this year didn't go well. Even though my only undergrad quant class was a stats class where I got a C+, I was able to talk about my new quant training in my SOP. I am decently proficient in R and LaTeX, which I put on my CV. So even though I had a poor quant background, I was able to show that I was very excited to learn more and taking concrete steps towards being proficient with the method. 

RESULTS:
Acceptances: Berkeley, UVA, GW, Duke
Rejections: Stanford, Columbia, MIT, OSU, UW Madison, UChicago, UCSD
Pending: none
Attending: TBD

LESSONS LEARNED:

1. My SOP read almost like a research proposal. I had more of my background in it in early drafts, and one of my advisors told me to make it much more about my research interests. She pointed out that adcomms want to be presented with an interesting question, shown that you can effectively frame it, and show that you have at least some inkling about how you could possibly solve it. PhDs are an intellectual pursuit, so let them see how you think and nobody would hold it against me if I didn't write my dissertation on the topic. I was afraid to do this strategy because thought I could seem too locked in to a topic, but I think it paid off to put research focus and the ability to frame a good question front and center. 

SOP Structure: The opening paragraph started with a big question, showed how our current answers were insufficient, and then the argued why the question is an important one to answer. Second paragraph was like a really condensed lit review to give background. Third paragraph laid out my hunches/potential causal mechanisms. Fourth was about my preliminary analysis (its related to my thesis), a current challenge, and ways to get around it for future studies. The fifth paragraph was more about other methods I would like to use/learn as well as some background about myself. Sixth paragraph was importance of the research/who the audience would be. Final paragraph was about program fit. Came out to ~1200 words. Overall, I talked very very little about myself and it read more like a research proposal. I cannot stress how critical multiple iterations and many rounds of feedback (especially from knowledgeable faculty) are for a good SOP. The SOP goal was to, as one of my advisors said, "catch their attention in the opening paragraph and convince them in the first few sentences that you’re a serious scholar asking important academic questions."

2. Yeah I knew early on that I wanted to do a PhD so do everything you can to build out a good resume and research agenda. BUILD CONNECTIONS WITH FACULTY. Also even if you don't want to do quant research, I think it pays to demonstrate at least familiarity with it. 

3. MOST IMPORTANTLY!!! I got a bunch of rejects last year. I applied again after finishing my undergrad thesis, starting a masters, reading a lot more, and learning some quant methods. Now I have 4 acceptances to some great schools. If you struck out this year, do not give up hope! 

4. Fit is important. Rankings are also important. As I am finding out with faculty meetings now, you get a much better sense of fit *once you have been accepted.* So apply to a diverse group of schools but also include well ranked ones you might not expect to be as great of a fit. They might surprise you once you get to talk to faculty. Also don't apply to a school to work with only one person. 

[XiPeepee]

PROFILE:

Type of Undergrad Institution:  American public 
Major(s)/Minor(s): BA in Political Science, BS in Math
Undergrad GPA:  3.92
Type of Grad:  NA
Grad GPA:  NA
GRE:  169Q, 161V, 5.0AW

Any Special Courses: 7 Graduate Courses: 2 Method, 3 Theory, 2 master courses (1 substance and 1 method); also tons of math and technical courses because of my major and interests. 

Letters of Recommendation: All 3 from tenured professors. Two are from professors whose subfields align with my research interests in my statement and who are prominent names in the fields. Of the two, I took several graduate courses and had frequent interactions (discussing course materials, research interests and suggestions, job rec, politics and current events generally) with one in and outside classrooms, and I was an RA with the other for almost my entire undergrad. I was told by POIs that both professors claimed I was one of their best students to have ever taught and they could attest to both my substantive understandings and technical skills. Although the third is not in my intended subfield, I took several undergrad and grad courses with them and had frequent interactions in and outside classrooms, and they could vow for my analytical and technical skills.

Teaching/Research Experience: I was a TA/grader/tutor for several math courses. I also had two RAships.

Other:  I am an international. 

RESULTS: 
Acceptances: Princeton, Berkeley, UCSD, NYU, WUSTL, Emory, UWashington
Rejections: Harvard, Stanford, Yale, MIT, Michigan, Columbia, UCLA, Duke, Chicago, Caltech, Northwestern Kellogg

LESSONS LEARNED:

1. SOP! SOP! SOP! By the time you are seriously looking at this forum and getting ready to apply, SOP is likely the only thing you can control. And it is the most important component. Make ample time for it. I started in the summer (though I also put it aside for quite a while). Keep editing it like your life depends on it. Make it letter perfect. No need for fancy literary genius or overly specific jargons (broadly used terms within a big subfield maybe ok). Make sure the names of schools, programs and POIs are correct. I revised my draft countless times, with probably 4-5 major revisions, and finally put it to bed the night before I started submitting my applications. Towards the end, I was nagging over one word or one sentence, but that should be your dedications. Get your professors to look at it. If you are fortunate enough, get them to go over it line by line, word by word (I was fortunate enough to have one such advisor), and provide edit suggestions. Send them your drafts 2-3 times after major revisions. Also get grad students (if you know any) and your friends to read them. Although grad students might not be experienced enough to judge what's a good SOP, they might be a better source to go over word choice, clarity, and other details that your professors didn't have time or energy for.

2. SOP structure (this is of course mine. So do modify it as it fits your profile. But I think the overall structure is pretty standard)

Paragraph one: Intro a broad research interest/question with some motivations (normative/past work experience + gaps in literatures). Make explicit the subfield and school you are applying to. Do be BRIEF here (probably not exceeding a dozen lines). The intro is important to make the adcom want to keep reading. One professor relay to me that they would read the intro, and if it is promising, they would keep reading, and keep iterating this for each paragraph; otherwise they would toss it. This is from one professor, of course, so take it with a grain of salt. The goal is to make it to the short list that all adcom members (or at least all those in charge of your subfields) will then read together.

Paragraph two and three: research questions and interests. These should be elaborations of your broad question posted in the intro. They may include why you want to pursue these questions (or rather, why these questions are worth pursuing? Any gap in the literatures that you think need to be addressed and can be addressed by your research? Any methodological innovations that can help bring new insights to these issues?) The common advice is not to be too broad or too narrow (the former signaling you don't know much about what you want to do; the latter limiting your "fit" with the department). This is of course hard to adjudicate. But it is a good thing to keep in mine as you talk with your professors and revise your draft. You can ask yourself questions such as will people studying different regions be interested in reading this? For mine, I noted a gap between two broad literatures, and proposed to study one particular sets of institutions that may contribute to filling this gap. In paragraph two, I used one sentence to note examples of previous works done by scholars, and used the majority of the paragraph to lay out my theoretical proposal. In paragraph three, I mostly added more possible empirical research and methods related to the theoretical motivations in paragraph two. I did this because I had both theoretical and empirical interests, and, to a lesser degree, to echo my past training in theory as well as substance. So adjust accordingly. For example, this might not be the best format if you are doing, say, ethnography and field works rather than formal modeling.

Paragraph four: substantive qualifications. Lay out what you have done previously that make you capable of answering those questions. These can be your job experiences from which you gained substantive familiarity with a particular issue (e.g. security, financial risk, media, etc.); classes (especially grad courses) in which you learned about related topics; RA experiences related to your interests. Even if you have trainings not directly related to your field, show it in a positive light. For example, even though my subfields of interests are not theory, I leverage my trainings in theory to show my theoretical understanding and analytical skills.

Paragraph Five: technical skills. My exact words from my advisors are don't be shy; brag about yourself. If you have a quant-focused major, make it explicit, even though they can see it on your transcript and resume/CV. If you have taken a bunch of math/econometric/stat/computation/quant/method classes, highlight the overall topics (for example, time-series stat). If you know some computational & data tools, write out. You should also showcase your relevant projects and RA experiences. Tell them what you did. If you were a grader/TA for some technical courses, also let them know. Again all of these stuff may well appear in your transcript and resume/CV, but it is the SOP that adcom read evaluate more carefully. So brag, brag brag.

Paragraph Six: state professors that you want to work with. Best to write down 3-5 professors, with each sentence highlighting why and how that one or two professor's research interests/past works/method expertise may fit with your agenda. Here is a strategic advice. We all know that we probably won't do exactly what we wrote on SOP; in fact, many don't do what they said they were interested in at all (and it is best to have some interests generally aside from what you wrote). But nonetheless, you should be able to write out why the POIs fit with whatever you said your research interests were in the previous paragraphs. After you get into the program, you might still have other professors you want to work with (and in fact, professors whom I didn't mention in my SOP or who are not even in my subfields of interests reached out to me after admission). The point is not to be deceptive, but to make your profile consistent and focused. 

3. Don't show too much political/normative stuff in your resume/CV/SOP, etc. I am sure given that we are studying PoliSci, most of us will be interested in these stuff and have done something related. But you don't want the adcom to think that you are motivated by normative values to attend grad school. You should rather try your best to signal you have great potentials to be a good scholar. Even if you are Sheldon Cooper-from-the-Big-Bang-Theory-type of person (whom I adore and would love to befriend), you don't need to show your fun/quirky sides until after they have committed hundreds of thousands of dollars to you.

4. Please don't request lukewarm letters. It is completely pointless and hurts your chance. Talk to your letter writer and make sure that they can write you a GOOD letter, if not great.

5. Unfortunately, the trend is that quant matters more and more, at least in many departments. So unless you are doing totally informal theory, history-type things, having at least some baseline quant/math backgrounds help a great deal. That may mean taking some math/method/quant/econometric courses; having quant-related internships/projects/RA; scoring well on GRE quant section. This is unfortunate, and you might not like it, but it is the reality.

6. Echoing @zoooxu, it is immensely helpful to have a friend who's also applying, if possible. I was fortunate to have one such great friend who's also applying for PoliSci, even though we have different subfield interests and took vastly different courses. We helped each other get through some tough times throughout the process (and in fact, throughout our entire undergrad career), and it was a long, dreadful, and difficult process that required lots of time and energy on top of everything else you are doing in life. Ask them to help you refine your SOP and writing sample, study for GRE together, share resources/intel/advice from professors and grad students each of you know, and reciprocate. If that's the case for you, be grateful that you are fortunate to have such a good friend, because you will be in the same academic circle for years to come, and it is difficult to find someone to read your writings in details once everything gets rolling.

7. You will be checking the forum and the result page and refresh your email a gazillion times every minute after you submitted your applications. And you will most likely be stressed and anxious as you see others get into schools you didn't even bother to apply. It's inevitable. It happens to all of us. Stay patient. Try your best to do something else, which is difficult, and the decisions will come eventually. One thing you shouldn't do though is to check the application portals. Nothing is gonna happen there. If you are admitted, DGS/POI will maybe email you before the portal is update; sometimes acceptances were updated on portals first, and you will get an automatic email anyway. In any case, no need to check the portals until you have got an email, a waste on your internet bill.

8. No need to expect results in January either. Shoot for the start of Feb for things to get rolling.

9. As you can see from my results, there is a significant amount of luck. I got offers from some top-ranked schools while other lower ranked ones rejected me. As iterated by others, it depends on a variety of factors that nobody can control. For example, it's related to who happen to be on the adcom that year. Some professors you are interested may be leaving and you don't know it, so your profile could be a "bad fit." Some may want to adjust their student composition depending on the research interests of students admitted in the past years. Some may have unexpected budget constraint (Harvard, smh). In any case, after you have done all you could to assemble an incredible application package, luck plays a huge part. So don't take it personally (you probably will anyway, as did I, but it needs to be said). Apply broadly (only to the schools that you think you will actually attend of course; five years is a long long time).

10. Grad school isn't everything. There are many things in life worth pursuing even if you don't end up where you want to be. I didn't end up where I want to be for undergrad, but it paved the way for my grad school application with the professors I met and friends I made. Same logic works for grad school applications. 

11. Good luck!!!!

 

[polyglotaspiring]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution:  Small liberal arts college - Top 5 in U.S.
Major(s)/Minor(s): International Relations (Major) / Economics (Minor)
Undergrad GPA:  3.85 / 4.0
Type of Grad:  Getting a Masters in Education 
Grad GPA:  4.0
GRE:  161Q/168V/5W
Letters of Recommendation: 4 tenured profs - 2 in Political Science, 1 in Korean Studies (my area focus), 1 in Japanese Studies (I TA'ed for her in college) 
Teaching/Research Experience: In college, I was a research assistant for one of the professors who wrote my LOR. I contributed research to his book that got him tenure, as well as co-published opinion editorials. We had a close relationship through four years and he saw me grow as a student/academic, so it was a really strong letter. I also interned at a think tank for a summer, and won the Boren Scholarship for Language Studies. Slightly unrelated but enriched my SOP, I also have 2 years of public school teaching experience from my participation in Teach For America.

RESULTS:
Acceptances: UC Irvine, UC Davis, UCLA
Rejections: Stanford, UC Berkeley
Pending: NYU, USC

Attending: Pending

LESSONS LEARNED:

My profile is not NEARLY as strong as some of the other applicants I've seen on this thread: Low GRE score (especially Quant), minimal research experience, no masters in the field, and kind of a non-linear path to pursuing a PhD so it was hard to articulate the career path switch in my SoP. Here are some things that helped my case:
1. LORs. Forge those connections with your professors! Sooo important! Also, don't settle for an "ok" letter of rec. Send your professors all of your materials when you ask them to write a rec: publications, CV, even application essays if you have them. That way, they have as much info as they possibly can to write your stellar rec.

2. Quant training. I was too "lazy" to retake my GRE because working full-time / studying for an extra test was not it, but I'm pretty convinced that if I just had that low quant score without my Econ minor or proven quantitative training I would not have gotten into any school. I had an econometrics analysis/quantitative section in my writing sample, and also detailed in my SoP the training I received in my Econ minor.

3. SoP. A lot of applicants have detailed their structures of the SoP and mine was pretty similar, so I won't go too deep into it. But yes, make sure your SoP emphasizes your RESEARCH EXPERIENCE/INTERESTS as well as weaves a short/concise story of why you're pursuing a PhD. Don't listen to friends in law school or med school about making your SoP more "story-like." You do need a story, but it should be like 5-10% of your SoP. PhD programs care a lot more about your research fit, previous experience/training, etc. Make SPECIFIC connections from your interests to profs at the school. Last, if you're like me, doing a career pivot after a few years of something else (for me, education), make sure to articulate your reason for switching (i.e. wanting to find solutions on a macro-level). Even better if you can connect your research interests to your current occupation.

4. Plan ahead. I didn't start thinking about applying until the summer before applications open, but I think I would have made more informed decisions about where to apply to if I started earlier. I made a Google Sheets with the university, average GRE admit scores, submission requirements, and most importantly, professors whose research I could write about in my SoP. Doing this frontload work early on will make the writing process so much easier.

Good luck!! I will update this when I commit to a school. If you are a future applicant to that school, feel free to reach out to me! I will be more than happy to chat.

Edited February 27, 2022 by polyglotaspiring

[catiecatie]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: An international university 
Major(s)/Minor(s): Econ
Undergrad GPA:  3.7+
Type of Grad:  Political Science MA program in the US
Grad GPA:  3.9+
GRE:  170Q, 158V, 4.5AW
Any Special Courses: lots of math/stats/econometrics courses, also took substantive IR courses
Letters of Recommendation: all three are from tenured political science professors well-known in the field
Teaching/Research Experience: 2 RAs but not in the US, no publication, 1 conference presentation
Other: IR/Methods subfield. 0 work experience, started MA straight out of undergrad

RESULTS:
Acceptances: Harvard, Princeton, Yale, UCSD, Duke, NYU, UW-Madison, UT-Austin, Ohio State
Rejections: MIT
Pending: Upenn (not likely to wait)

Attending: Not sure yet

LESSONS LEARNED:

1. Similar to what others have said, my SOP is completely focused on research questions, including what I have already done+ what other questions I would like to answer+how I would approach these questions. It was only in the last two paragraphs that I mentioned the training I received and whom I would like to work with. 

2. Don't worry too much about the application process and how it works, just try to do good research, and the professors can tell from your materials. I don't know what others think, but I personally don't think applying for a Political Science PhD program is a strategic thing. This means crafting materials, building up profile, getting good stats is not the best way to increase one's chances. Work hard to do good research and write "real" research papers. This kind of connects with your future paths in the PhD program and even afterwards: I didn't do anything specific for the application, I simply showed what I had done so far to the committee. (I wrote my SOP in 2 days, and my WS is a paper I had been working on for a while)

3. Try your best to write a writing sample that is a serious research paper. Don't just put together a paper that shows your ideas and skills; just write a paper that you think is potentially publishable (which means: interesting research question, contributes to the existing literature, and uses appropriate research methods). Ask yourself if the paper is worth reading for a professor in the field, or is it just a random essay. In fact, if you are going to pursue a PhD, you should write every paper with the aim of publication. I didn't publish anything, and I didn't do a lot of RAs, but I had two good papers which my professors told me both are publishable and that one of them had a good chance of getting published in a top journal. When talking with my POIs after getting admitted, they all mentioned that they liked my writing sample (one of them even asked me where I plan to publish it).  

4. Find letter writers who can speak about your potentials as a scholar, not just ones that you have taken courses with.

5. The application process is not as random as people may think, but I guess fit really matters. Apply to a handful of schools, but only apply to those that you are interested in attending. I didn't get a lot of rejections, and I think this is because I just didn't apply to schools where there isn't anyone I can work with (for instance, I didn't apply to Stanford, Berkeley, Columbia, etc. because the fit is bad)

6. Something I was also wondering while I applied was whether reaching out to POIs before applying is helpful. But I decided not to contact anyone, and it seems that it doesn't hurt.

Good luck!!

Edited February 27, 2022 by catiecatie

[Avocado_town]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: International University from Latin America
Major(s)/Minor(s): Political Science
Undergrad GPA:  3,83 (equivalence)
Type of Grad: No grad studies
Grad GPA:  
GRE: I took it three times (I hope no one else goes trough this haha): The results I sent to all the school were 162v, 164q, 5,0w. I also got 165v, 158q, 4.0w; 166v, 157q, 4.0w. I sent the second sent to Princeton and Northwestern too, since they said they accept multiple GRE scores.

Any Special Courses: I took courses on qualitative methods, quantitative methods (data analysis, were I learned R), research design, and calculus. All those were required courses at my undergraduate school. 
Letters of Recommendation: 2 asisstant professors and 1 associate professor. The first assistant professor was my thesis supervisor and then I was his teaching assistant and now research assistant (I almost didn't even need to ask for his letter, since he always encouraged me to go to grad school). The second assistant professor was a former associate professor at my school and now an assistant professor at a R1 university in USA. The associate professor is a professor for whom I was a research assistant for one summer. Not sure if this is really relevant, but I appliead as a political theorist, but the associate professor works on International Relations.
Teaching/Research Experience: I was teaching assistant 10 times, for 6 professors in 4 different courses (mosty in political theory and two times in Intro to RI). I was research assistant to a Professor during one summer, I did a 4-month intership working mostly in research, and since November I am a reseach assistant again.
Other: I'm ranked second in my cohort (undergrad).

RESULTS:
Acceptances: University of Virginia, University of Colorado Boulder.
Rejections: Princeton, Harvard, Yale, California Berkeley, Northwestern, Columbia, Michigan (Ann Arbor), Brown, Texas at Austin, Pennsylvania.
Pending: NYU (assumed rejection)

Attending: University of Virginia.

LESSONS LEARNED:

1. It is obviously difficult to be sure of what you learned from your application cycle, since most of the times (unless you ask and have luck) you don't really know what you did good to get an offer and what you did wrong to get a rejection. 

2. This is one thing one of my recommenders told me: you need to know someone who knows someone there. This means: you need to get recommenders who know people at the schools you are applying to. This makes sense, since it is important for the prople on the committe to properly assess if they can trust the recommender and what his/her letter say. It also make sense, since your recommender can approach the professor he/she knows at the school you are applying to and tell him/her "hey, please don't forget to look at this applicant's file". This will surely not grant you an offer, but it may help you to be noticed by the committe.

3. Start early. I mean it is important to start early to look for programs, asking your prospective recommenders if they can write a letter for you, working on your statement of purpose/personal statement, and choosing/working on your writing sample. 

4. Ask your recommenders (or maybe grad students or other professors) to read your application materials and give you comments about them. Maybe you can ask them to share they application materials with you. Those worked for them, and they probably know what they could have done better. One of my professors shared his SoP with me and pointed out all the things he thought were not good or simply bad.

5. Fit is important, especially when deciding between offers. I applied to 13 schools and almost applied to a 14th. Besides, not every university offers political theory. Therefore, not every school I applied to were a good fit for my interest. Maybe if I were to do all this again, I would avoid some schools that I know were not good fits for my interests. Obviously as a theorist you want to apply to Harvard, Princeton, and Yale. I did it, but knowing that from those, only Princeton was a really good fit for me. Berkeley and Columbia weren't really good fits for me. But when you have to decide between different offers, that's when you really have to consider which of the universities from where you get an offer is the best place to do what you want to do in grad school. 

6. Once you get at least one acceptance, start talking with the people from that department, particularly professors - and grad students if possible. That will help you to get an idea of what the department's general atmosphere is, and if it is really what you expect. Talk about professors' researach interest, the courses they give at the graduate level and that kind of things. If you can, talk to grad students and ask them what they think about the program, what they don't like, and so on.

[hawnsay]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: San Diego State University
Major(s)/Minor(s): International Security and Conflict Resolution aka ISCOR (Major)/Islamic and Arabic Studies (Minor)
Undergrad GPA: 3.61
Type of Grad: San Diego State University (MA in Political Science)
Grad GPA: 3.77
GRE: 161V/158Q/6.0AW
Any Special Courses: Seminar in Scope and Methods of Political Science, Seminar in Research Methods and Design
Letters of Recommendation: 3 LORs; 1st writer taught me as an undergrad and grad student and was my primary person for the comprehensive exams I needed to graduate with my MA; 2nd writer taught me as an undergrad and grad student and inducted me into Phi Beta Kappa; 3rd writer only taught me for grad school and was the secondary person for my comprehensive exams
Teaching/Research Experience: TA as an undergrad student for ISCOR/POL S classes for one professor from 2012-2015; TA as a grad student for ISCOR/POL S classes for several different professors from 2015-2018
Other: Dean's List as an undergrad for 7 semesters; inducted into Phi Beta Kappa during my 4th and final year as an undergrad; graduated with my MA in 2018 and worked for several years before applying for Fall 2022 PhD admissions cycle

RESULTS:
Acceptances: University of Missouri, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, University of Georgia (from waitlist)
Rejections: University of Connecticut, Cornell, University of Maryland-College Park, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Northwestern, Ohio State, University of Washington, Vanderbilt
Pending: N/A

Attending: University of Georgia

LESSONS LEARNED:

1) I started studying for the GRE in January 2021 and took the GRE in June 2021. I'm not sure if that is a "long" time to study and prepare, but I graduated with my MA in 2018 and have been away from school since then. I performed better on the GRE practice exams I took before I took the real exam, so that was a bit of a downer. On the other hand, when I took the GRE in 2015 to start my MA program, I received a 159V/156Q/5.0AW so all of my scores DID go up this time around. I'm not sure how much it mattered, but I certainly think a higher quant score would have helped my applications a bit.

2) I reached out to professors in Spring 2021 and advised that I was going to be applying for school and needed LORs. They all agreed and were ok with submitting as many letters as needed. This worked out as I applied to 11 schools and I read horror stories of other applicants having a professor that would only submit a limited number of letters (I.e. to 5 schools instead of all of them). I did not see these letters so I do not know what they said or didn't say, but they clearly worked enough to get me into a few schools. As mentioned above, 2 of them taught me as an undergrad and grad student, while 1 only taught me as a grad student. Furthermore, 2 of them oversaw my comprehensive exams so they was something to discuss.

3) My writing sample was one of my comprehensive exam responses. I think this may have hurt my application a bit as it was not a formal research paper, and I did not have any publications or legitimate research experience. However, based on all of the documents I still have, I do believe this was my strongest piece of writing that I could use as a sample. Again, I cannot definitively say how much this mattered, but I imagine it did.

4) Fit certainly is important, but I don't think it is the only thing that matters obviously. Based on my own interests, I found Nebraska-Lincoln, Washington, and Georgia were my best fits. Other solid fits included Minnesota-Twin Cities, Vanderbilt, and Cornell. I know there is no such thing as a "safety" school when it comes to PhD admissions, but I did look at Missouri, Nebraska-Lincoln, and Connecticut as safer options based on ranking. Missouri and Nebraska-Lincoln accepted me while Connecticut did not, but Georgia did. I think this is a testament to how much fit matters, as a higher ranked school (Georgia) accepted me (even if it was from the waitlist) while a lower ranked school (Connecticut) did not.

5) I took an irregular path to get here. If I could turn back time, I definitely would have put the necessary work in to write a thesis instead of doing comprehensive exams. Furthermore, I would have tried to get RA experience and get something published. I do believe the lack of these experiences probably played the biggest part in my admissions results.

6) Be prepared to face a dilemma once April 15 hits and you have been accepted in at least one school and waitlisted somewhere. I had no choice but to accept an offer by April 15. Then a couple days later, I was accepted at my waitlisted school. I mulled the decision over and came to the conclusion that withdrawing from my original school and accepting the offer from the waitlisted school was better for me and my future. I firmly believe it is perfectly ok to do this, but you should communicate clearly to both schools the situation at hand prior to April 15. The DGSs at both schools knew of the situation and I even politely asked the original school for a deadline to accept their offer. They did not grant this so they had to know the possibility of what was to come. I wrote a polite, apologetic email to my original school and accepted the offer from the waitlisted school. The DGS at my original school took a couple days to respond, but she did respond with a short but polite email acknowledging the difficulty of the decision and wishing me the best with my academic career.

7) I can't say money shouldn't matter to everyone since everybody's situation is different, but I will say that I took a cut in funding to go to the better school. If you can afford to do so, consider it. There is a ton of debate over how much ranking matters past a certain point (I.e. some say ranking doesn't matter once you are like out of the top 25 schools...but does it really not matter anymore? Look at placement record, for example) but I do think a higher ranking school likely leads to an increased chance of landing the type of job you want.

Just remember that we all are on different paths doing different things. If you want to change your path, it isn't impossible. Put the time in to give yourself the best chance possible, and if it doesn't work out, just be sure that you did everything you could to make it happen so there is no regret later on down the line.

I can't think of anything else to add right now. If I do, I'll edit and update this. Anyways...if you got any questions, you know how to contact me.

[modesteffect]

PROFILE:
Type of Undergrad Institution: International
Major(s)/Minor(s): Computer Science
Undergrad GPA: 3.5
Type of Grad: International (MPA, MA in Political Science, MSc in Computer Science)
Grad GPA: 3.8
GRE: 159V/169Q/4.5AW
Any Special Courses: Some methods courses
Letters of Recommendation: 3 LORs; 1st writer my MPA prof teaching quant; 2nd writer a well known prof in the field; 3rd writer a well known prof in the field
Teaching/Research Experience: A few RAs
Other: worked in the tech industry as an engineer for a few years

RESULTS:
Acceptances: Harvard (off waitlist), Princeton (off waitlist), UCSD (off waitlist), Penn, SAIS, NYU (MA), Rochester (MA)
Rejections: All else out of 17
Pending: Georgetown (waitlist)

Attending: Harvard

LESSONS LEARNED:

I will try to be short.

1) for GRE, enough is good. After the cutoff first round, it's no longer used. I am guessing 155V, 160Q for non-native speakers. GPA is not important. You don't need to have near perfect 4.0. 3.6-3.8 should be good enough.

2) if you are an old applicant, dont get discouraged. Pursue your dream. I am already 30 after years of work. I switched to polisci from engineering literally in late 2020 but I was driven by interest and passion. But being old does bring you some disadvatanges: one of my poi at Harvard told me that committee likes my experience but may hesitate because of non-typical profiles. As they pick more safe profiles first, this explains my non-typical result of so many waitlists. But yeah I eventually get into schools like UCSD, Harvard, Princeton and Penn. 

3) Fit matters. Schools that either admits me or put me on a waitlist have more than 3 profs doing what I want to do. 

4) Showing your research capabilities is important: this can be from RA, writing sample, SOP, work experience, etc.

5) My SoP focused on my experience rather than research topics. I later realize it may be a mistake and could explain only 2/17 schools sent me straight offers.

6) Don't lose hope in Feb/March, especially if you are on some waitlists. I got off three waitlists on April 14, 15 and 16. There are lots of movements during the last period.